Tendance Coatesy

Left Socialist Blog

Archive for the ‘Free Speech’ Category

Iranian Elections: Theocracy, not Democracy.

leave a comment »

Iranian Theocracy: Islamism is Incompatible with Democracy.

As ‘elections’ in Iran approach (February the 26th) it’s well to take stock.

Not so long ago, well in 2010, Labour Candidate for Chippenham (2015), Andy Newman argued (Socialist Unity),

Iran simply is a constitutional democracy. I refer Dave to the discussion of the 1979 constitution in Ervand Abrahamian’s book “A History of Modern Iran” Cambridge, 2008. pages 162 to 169. Abrahamian is no apologist for the government, and his book is dedicated to the “memory of more than three hundred political prisoners hanged in 1988 for refusing to feign belief in supernatural”. Abrahamian discusses how the constitution tempers the power of the Guardian Council.

The electorate, all women and men over 16 years old, can vote for the president, as well as for members of the the Majlis (parliament), and provincial and district councils. The Majlis has authority to pass laws, scrutinise the activity of the executive, approve or veto the president’s choices of ministers, debate any issue, and appoint people to the Guardian Council. Indeed over the last 30 years the majlis has acted as a much more substantive parliamentary body in holding the executive to account than the Palace of Westminster has.

The maturity of the democracy is shown in the way that two loose political parties, the Radicals and Conservatives have developed, that government initiatives are often modified or defeated by the Majlis, and that contested transitions of power have been effected by means of democratic vote.

The paradox that this democratic infrastructure exists alongside the concept of “jurists’ guardianship”velayet-e faqeh derived from the revolutionary Islamic theory of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini explains a lot about modern Iran. The Islamic revolution was not per se a religious one, but one that combined a complex mixture of nationalism, political populism and religious radicalism.

This ‘paradox‘ is getting a parading just now.

The grandson of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, founder of Iran’s Islamic Republic, will not be allowed to stand in this month’s election in Iran, the clerical vetting body said on Wednesday, in a blow to reformist forces in the country.

Hassan Khomeini, 43, the first member of the Khomeini family to register for polls and an ally of President Hassan Rouhani, lost an appeal to the body against a ban. The setback comes at a time of growing rivalry between reformists and conservatives stirred by a deal with world powers that lifted economic sanctions against Tehran as part of a nuclear agreement.

Hardliners fear Iranian voters will now be more inclined to reward reformist and moderate candidates in Feb. 26 elections to the 290-seat parliament and the 88-seat Assembly of Experts, the body responsible for choosing the next Supreme Leader.

The Guardian Council, a clerical vetting body responsible for overseeing all elections, excluded thousands of parliamentary hopefuls and hundreds of candidates for the Assembly of Experts, leaving a field mostly of conservatives.

Reuters.

You will find scant reference to the details of this “Vetting” in the house journal of the anti-imperialism of fools, Coutnerpunch. They are more concerned, as, criticising US imperialism first obliges, in the Washington Tehran nuclear deal.

Franklin Lamb for example concentrates on this,

Notes from Tehran. February the 12th.

Many relatively moderate candidates were rejected by hard-liners during the vetting phase. Several of these blocked candidates support President Hassan Rouhani, a key architect of the Iran nuclear deal that they support.

And,

So-called moderate supporters of Iran’s President Rohani may have a major impact on this month’s elections and bring changes to Iran. The Iranian public is sophisticated about what JCPOA is likely to mean for them. Recent polls show that there has been an approximately ten percent drop in public support for the agreement.

It is left to Jane Green in the Morning Star to expose the nature of this ‘Islamic Democracy’.

…the coming elections in Iran are little more than the veneer of democracy, as the ability to stand is tightly controlled by the Guardian Council and the Supreme Leader, Ayotollah Ali Khamenei.

Elections to the Majlis (parliament) are held every four years and prominent figures hoping to appear on the ballot paper need to determine beforehand whether Khamenei and his inner circle of advisers will oppose their candidacy.

It is said that the Supreme Leader does not explicitly advise anyone against running, but his office or other high-ranking officials will often reveal his views on specific cases.

Also, when candidates register their names, the Guardian Council has to qualify them based on several criteria, notably their full “practical” loyalty to the Supreme Leader and their recognition of his authority over all matters of the state.

Finally, once elections are complete, the Guardian Council is solely responsible for endorsing the final result, despite sharing supervision over the vote counting process with the Interior Ministry.

Through these methods the Islamic Republic can claim that the elections are free and fair because everyone is eligible to vote.

While attempting to control the outcome of the elections, the regime’s leaders are keen for a massive turnout for the contest in four weeks’ time and have mobilised their entire publicity machine.

The turnout in this election has assumed significance since it will be used as a measure of the popularity of the regime and a test of its political stability.

However this disguises the high degree of manipulation which precedes the selection of those who appear on the ballot paper at all.

Given the conservative nature of the regime in Iran and the fears of many hardliners that Rouhani is “too reformist,” there is every chance that conservatives will take the opportunity to further squeeze out the limited voices for change which there may be in the Majlis.

Of 3,000 candidates put forward by reformists, only 30 have been allowed to stand by the Guardian Council, a mere one in 100 of those wishing to stand.

It is worth remembering that these are candidates who are deemed “reformist” within the very narrow confines of that term in Iranian politics.

There are no candidates opposed to the regime, standing for the rights of women or actively promoting the right of Iranian workers to engage in free and open trade union activity.

Persistent reports in Iranian opposition media indicate that the powerful Sepah Pasdaran (the Guards Corps) are confident that at least 180 out of the 290 seats of the new Majlis will be filled with their candidates, carefully selected from within the ranks of their commanders and ideologists.

In total 40 per cent of the 12,000 hopefuls for parliamentary election, including a significant number of MPs in the outgoing Majlis, have failed to qualify.

Those disqualified include Ali Motahari, a persistent critic of the hard-line Islamists in the regime, and Rasoul Montajabnia, the vice-president of the pro-reform Etemad Melli Party founded by Mehdi Karoubi, one of the two reformist candidates during the 2009 presidential candidates.

Others excluded are Majid Farahani, the head of the pro-reform Nedaye Iranian Party, and Akbar Alami, a former reformist member of parliament.

Sadegh Zibakalam, professor of political science at Tehran University, stated that the reformists now expected the president to step forward.

“According to the constitution, as the president and the country’s second power [after the leader] Mr Rouhani should supervise the implementation of the constitution. So now everyone’s expecting him to protest against the wide disqualifications.”

Jamshid Ahmadi, assistant general secretary of solidarity group Committee for the Defence of the Iranian People’s Rights (Codir), has called into question the legitimacy of the elections.

“It is clear that many potential candidates have been excluded due to their political opinions,” he said.

“That hardly makes for an electoral process that can, in any normal sense, be described as free and fair.

“Until real opposition candidates are allowed to stand and the Iranian regime cleans up its act on human rights the elections will be little more than the illusion of democracy.”

Islamist Theocracy is incompatible with democracy. 

Written by Andrew Coates

February 13, 2016 at 4:23 pm

Chair of Young Greens Against “Penalising” Full-Face Veil in Schools.

with 4 comments

https://dykewriter.files.wordpress.com/2015/03/disappeared-women.png?w=640

Photo by Yemeni photographer Boushra al-Moutawakel.

This has appeared in Left Foot Forward. 

Earlier this week, Ofsted head Michael Wilshaw confirmed that inspectors can downgrade schools if they feel that the wearing of the niqab – by either teachers or pupils – is impairing learning. Phrased like this, it seems a reasonable policy.

In reality, however, opening the door to penalising the wearing of Islamic dress in this way is deeply worrying.

For a start, it’s unclear exactly why the niqab might be an obstacle to learning. Muslims have been teaching, learning and otherwise communicating wearing the full-face veil for centuries in Islamic countries all around the world.

Writes Sophie van der Ham co-chair of the Young Greens on Left Foot Forward.

I shall not discuss her comments on Ofstead’s targets.

I shall leave aside the obvious point that the full-face veil is  clearly a barrier to anybody who relies on lip-reading, and is clearly a barrier to interacting to people on an important non-verbal basis – seeing people’s expressions.

And the fact that dress codes exist in all schools.

The full-face veil introduces the fact of religious practice into all school activities.

The author of the article puts approval of sanctions on the Niqab in the context of the Prevent Strategy and attempts by the British state to tackle Islamist extremism. She sees this as part of a “a trend in recent weeks and months that has seen the practise, expression or even discussion of Islam in schools as suspicious.”

Undoubtedly the government’s plans and actions do little to deal with what is a real problem. Few will have much confidence in a Cabinet or a Prime Minister’s anti-racist status when they have shown callous disregard for refugees.

But if indeed Van der Ham thinks that there is no problem with Islamism then she is welcome to visit Kobane and see the graves the martyrs who died protecting the Kurdish town from Daesh, and the unmarked remains of the tens of thousands of who have been slaughtered by the genocidal Islamists, enslaved, been raped and tortured. Fighting the religious cleansing of non-Muslims form the region, and the inter-Islamic murders, are frankly the number one issue in the world today.

Faced with this horrifying religious murder it is no doubt commendable that the Young Greens find time to worry about the fate of school pupils proclaiming their religious identity.

She could have there to see our Kurdish sisters and brothers when this happened: Kurds Celebrate Liberation of Kobane as Islamic State Calls for New Paris-Style Attacks. Liz Fields.

If Van de Ham thinks that this do not affect Britain –  however much the hundreds of UK volunteers for the death squads of Daesh are in the minority – then perhaps she should have watched The Jihadis Next Door, or looked at the list of those who have left the country to join the genociders.

There is another context.

It is impossible to ignore that it is an erosion of the separation of religion from the state and legal and educational system.

Time to end the special favours shown to faith schools: Allowing new free schools to select 100% of admissions on the grounds of religion would be a backward step that would further divide communities.

Jamie Martin Guardian 26th of January.

Faith schools accused of ‘religious racism’ for turning away pupils. Rabbi says closing the door to children over race would be ‘intolerable’ but religious segregation is permitted.

Richard Garner. Independent. 28.1.16.

Supporting the full-face veil in schools lets the way open for religious division and the exercise of religious power in the classroom, and, one should underline, will happen if the teacher herself is wearing this garment? What message does this give to ‘non-believers’?

There are many serious difficulties at stake.

This article explains some of  the wider issues about what some would call the “religious racism” of the Niqab.

Islamic veiling is a form of sexist patriarchal oppression, and supporters of equality have a responsibility to say so, argues Terri Murray

In Islamic cultures the predominant theological reasoning for veiling seems to be that the female body is such a powerful sexual object that nothing short of covering it can prevent men from molesting it. According to Islamic Hadith (or poor interpretations of it) the female body is so powerfully sexual that it is literally irresistible to the opposite sex. I refer those who argue that this is a misinterpretation of Islam to this statement by Australia’s influential senior Islamic cleric, Sheik Taj Aldin as-Hilali:

“If you take out uncovered meat and place it outside. . . without cover, and the cats come to eat it. . . whose fault is it, the cats’ or the uncovered meat’s? The uncovered meat is the problem. If she was in her room, in her home, in her hijab, no problem would have occurred.”

Some Westernised Muslim academics deny the primary theological significance of the burqa and instead claim that it is imbued with powerful symbolism by Western colonialism. Westerners, they argue, see the burqa as a symbol of the irrevocable “otherness” of Muslims. Accordingly the “hysterical” reactions to veiling are just a Western contrivance (a pretext for racist attitudes towards Muslims following 9/11). Yet the discourse vacillates between this claim and the contradictory claim that the veil has no special significance other than what the wearer intends it to mean, and so is no more than a form of personal expression – a symbol of Muslim women’s freedom to “be themselves”.

Sharia law is still enforced in approximately 35 nations, where some form of veiling is compulsory. An estimated 83 Sharia courts operate in England today. Many Muslim families living in Western Europe use legal forms of coercion to make girls and women conform to veiling. The murder of Shafilea Ahmed, by her own parents, is a case study in how Europeans respond to these situations of family violence with an embarrassed silence, rather than the kind of outrage that would be seen as appropriate were its victims not exclusively female. The Iranian and Kurdish Women’s Rights Organisation (Ikwro) found last year that 39 out of 52 police forces across the UK had recorded at least 2,823 “honour” attacks over 2010. Some forces showed a jump of nearly 50 per cent in such cases from 2009. This is the backdrop against which Muslims in Europe claim that wearing the burqa is a “choice”.

The claim that covering yourself up in public is an empowering choice insults the intelligence and dignity of women everywhere, just as the theological claim that the burqa is a necessary defence against predatory male sexuality insults Muslim men insofar as it treats them as fundamentally incapable of responsibility for their sexual behaviour.

The reason Western feminists (male or female) object to seeing women in burqas is not that we can’t tolerate diversity, but that the burqa is a symbol of patriarchal Islam’s intolerance of dissent and desire to contain and repress female sexuality.

Written by Andrew Coates

January 28, 2016 at 5:24 pm

Galloway Faces Strong Left Challenge as Communist League Silberman Stands for London Mayor.

with 15 comments

Silberman Threatens Galloway’s ‘left’ Mayor Campaign. 

The newshounds of the IBT had a scoop a few days ago.

Viva! Jonathan Silberman – Communist London Mayor hopeful dreams of Cuban revolution in Britain

Jonathan Silberman was a teenager when he and his friends sketched out their plan for global revolution – half a century later the factory worker and veteran Communist is still waiting.

But unlike so many other teenage revolutionaries, Silberman, 64, has not lost his zeal in the years in between. He is currently running for London mayor under the banner of the Communist League. He is a few days away from his annual trip to the Havana Book Fair as IBTimes UK meets him in a north London pub.

Ace-reporter Orlando Crowroft continues,

Founded in 1988, the Communist League grew out of one of many schisms in the British socialist left, remaining close to the American Socialist Worker’s Party (SWP) which, in typical fashion, is a mortal enemy of the UK party of the same name. Silberman is rarely seen without a several copies of the party’s magazine, the Militant, under his arm and a selection of books from US-based radical publishing house, Pathfinder.

The influence of this group, the Socialist Workers Party (US) on the British Communist League (Wikipedia)  is clear -in fact it derives from a  faction inside the International Marxist Group which was essential a branch of the American organisation with, how can I put it tactfully, certain ‘special’ characteristics of their own. Okay – a slightly cultish obnoxious  groupuscule.

…neither that nor the bloody authoritarian nightmare that the Soviet Union had become after Stalin served to change Silberman’s mind about revolution. There was a still a shining light for him in the form of Cuba which, even now, he defends as a true a socialist revolution. A fluent Spanish speaker, Silberman still visits Cuba annually and speaks glowingly about the country’s health care system and Che Guevara, the late revolutionary and global icon.

In truth much to admire in Jonathan.

I recall him in the International Marxist Group as a sensible (in IMG terms that is) and dedicated bloke. Despite being in a rival faction (Tendency ‘B’ – led by Livingstone’s economics Guru, John Ross), he was one of the few able to have a rational conversation with his opponents – in this case me. The drift to the US SWP is something I know little of, for the good reason I was living in France when this happened. His views on Cuba aside (although given the ‘new thinking’ that began in the 1980s from his group’s New York HQ and Jack Barnes it’s hard to ever  put Cuba to one side) he has lived the life of somebody who followed the “turn to industry” in all seriousness – working in factories.

Silberman sees trends that bode well for working class consciousness in this country and, to be fair, as a worker at a factory in Hertfordshire he actually comes into contact with workers on a daily basis – unlike the massed ranks of the radical London left, content to cheer the revolution from posh North London cafes.

Silberman spends the bulk of his Saturdays knocking on doors in working class housing estates, and finds the respondents receptive.

“I’ll tell you something interesting, it doesn’t matter if someone is Labour, Tory or Ukip. It makes no difference to their interest in our politics. Supporting Ukip doesn’t signify some big right wing ideology. I don’t think that there is a massive anti-immigrant sentiment in the working class,” he said.

Silberman, who visited Calais last year and believes in open borders, said that when people do express anti-immigration views he is often able to convince them that far from being divided from workers from abroad, they should be joining with them to fight for better pay and conditions.

“Our proposal is to use the unions to organise a real campaign to recruit workers, foreign-born workers, through militant struggle and through defence of our rights. Why don’t we fight for massive rise in the minimum wage that would benefit all workers? Why don’t we fight for more housing?” he said.

In the article Silberman professes not to know how many members the Communist League has. Which is surprising since I saw them at a TUC Demonstration a couple of years ago – around 7 – around a stall in Hyde Park. Somebody a lot more familiar with the group than I am  pointed them out by name. He suggested that perhaps there were a couple absent that day, no doubt drawn by the rival attractions of a Derby and Joan dance.

Despite the loyalty towards Cuba the SWP (US) is not universally loved, admired, or even given the time of the day by much of the left, anywhere.

Here are some of many accounts of the disputes which have left the ‘party’ with reportedly under 100 members: What happened to the SWP (U.S.)?: Recent memoirs stir discussion by Dayne Goodwin

Silberman stood in last year’s General Election in Hackney North, and got 102 votes, which if repeated across the country means that the Communist League had potentially  66,300 ballot papers.

 His election leaflet (view here) contained this comment,

Working Farmers – Allies of the Working Class Dairy farmers facing rising costs and cuts in the  price they get for milk have taken to the streets. Such struggles by family farmers should win the support of the workers movement.

United in struggle, workers and working farmers are stronger. And through struggle a revolutionary alliance of workers and farmers can be forged.

London farmers and revolutionary workers will no doubt respond this time round.

 

 

Written by Andrew Coates

January 27, 2016 at 1:44 pm

Galloway ‘Not the Killing of Alexander Litvinenko’ – Mocks Russian’s Death on Twitter.

with 5 comments

The Blair Doc

Will Galloway now produce ‘Not the Killing of Alexander Litvinenko’?

George Galloway Dismisses Putin Links To Alexander Litvinenko Murder And Accuses BBC Of Holding ‘Show Trial’.

Reports the Huffington Post.

George Galloway has rejected a public inquiry’s conclusion that Vladimir Putin was “probably” involved in the murder of ex-Russian spy Alexander Litvinenko – claiming the process was “riddled with imperfection” and accusing the BBC’s Newsnight of conducting a “show trial”.

The former MP, who is standing to be London mayor for the Respect Party, defended the Russian President for “trying to restore a lot of the lost prestige” in the country and being “the most popular politician on the planet”.

The ex-Labour politician also likened Sir Robert Owen’s inquiry – which found Russians Andrei Lugovoi and Dmitry Kovtun to have deliberately poisoned the 43-year-old in London in 2006 by putting the radioactive substance polonium-210 into his drink at a hotel – to the inquest into the death of Iraq weapons inspector, Dr David Kelly, which has been blighted by cover-up theories.

As part of an attempt to pour scorn on the findings of the Public Inquiry Galloway has since tweeted this.

And re-tweeted this distasteful material.

Will Galloway  consider”crowd funding” a documentary which will expose the real reasons for these claims about Putin?

In the meantime we have this to look forward to:

Reserve your DVD at The Works, Remainder Store.

Written by Andrew Coates

January 23, 2016 at 12:08 pm

Ligue des droits de l’homme demands France lifts state of emergency.

leave a comment »

 

« Avec l’état d’urgence, celle qui a perdu, c’est la démocratie »

Protest at French State of Emergency: between the Hammer of Terrorism and the Anvil of the State…. (December). 

La Ligue des droits de l’homme demande la fin de l’état d’urgence

Reports Le Monde. 20.1.16.

Adapted Extracts.

In the formal appeal to the French State Council, made ​​by the lawyer Patrice Spinosi, the Ligue suggests that in the event of a refusal to withdraw the full force of the state of emergency, it should at least suspend some of its measures, especially administrative searches and the prohibition of public meetings. In the short term  they could let run house arrests continue until 26 February but to ban the Ministry of Interior and the prefects from implementing  other measures.

“The persistence of a state of emergency more than two months after its declaration constitutes a serious and manifestly illegal attack on  fundamental freedoms”, they have written in the petition to the State Council. And evoke the right to respect for privacy and family, the freedom to go and come, freedom of work, etc. To justify such a request, the League of Human Rights, does mean “to challenge the centrality of the fight against terrorism”…..

The bulk of administrative and house arrest raids were ordered in the first two weeks following the attacks of 13 November. Jean-Jacques Urvoas, chairman of the Law Committee, has noted that “the main targets and goals had been treated” and that “the surprise effect has largely faded”.

Perhaps the most important part of the Ligue’s statement is that they fear  that continuing the state of emergency will  mean  authorising a permanent state of exception in the name of the fight against terrorism, and the definitive end of a state of law. (à autoriser le maintien perpétuel du régime exceptionnel au nom de la lutte contre le terrorisme et ainsi renoncer définitivement à l’Etat de droit)

L’Humanité reported at the start of the year,

Five weeks of the state of emergency, 2,700 searches and… one indictment

Translated Sunday 3 January 2016, by Adrian Jordan

TALLY. In just over a month, the state of emergency has allowed the police to seize arms and drugs, but not to bring new terrorist networks to light. One sole indictment for terrorism has been issued.

Approved in a heavy vote in the aftermath of the 13 November attacks, the state of emergency, over and above the infringement of liberties which are inherent to it, has it been effective in the fight against terrorism? It is doubtful. Certainly, no new attacks have been perpetrated in the country since the deployment of police, the banning of rallies, the 2,700 searches held between 14 November and 16 December, or even the 360 cases of house-arrest sanctioned by the interior ministry. But no indictments seem to have resulted thanks to the big kerfuffle created in the fight for security.

To date, one sole indictment for criminal association in connection with terrorist activity has been issued against a 27-year-old Chechen national, who has been placed under house-arrest in Tours. During a search of his home, police found a video in which he made allegiance to Daesh [1]. During questioning, the man admitted putting the said video online but denied any will to commit terrorist action. In total, three antiterrorist investigations were spurred by these searches, including the one involving a Chechen who came to France with his family as an adolescent.

Even if they have not dismantled new Islamist networks, at least the police have not completely wasted their time. “431 weapons, including 41 military-grade weapons, were seized in three weeks, which represents a third of the year’s seizures”, advanced Bernard Cazeneuve on 15 December. 488 judicial procedures have been started, of which 167 for drug offences. “Seizing arms and drugs, is all well and good, but that has very little to do with the fight against terrorism”, underlined Maître Henri Leclerc, honorary president of the Ligue des droits de l’Homme (League of Human Rights). Although it does not usually make statements, the national conference of prosecutors sounded the alarm on Friday, alluding to a judicial frenzy since the 13 November attacks. In addition, prosecutors have announced the intention to set aside certain activities such as crime prevention or participation in urban policy, to concentrate on activities “having an operational interest”. As yet there has been no response from the Chancellery.

[1Translator’s note: I have deliberately changed legitimating terms such as IS and jihadist to Daesh and Islamist as I feel it would be irresponsible journalism not to do so (even within the remit

Written by Andrew Coates

January 21, 2016 at 1:00 pm

Political Confusion in Europe, from the anti-imperialism of fools to racism.

leave a comment »

Berlin last Weekend: Socialist ‘martyrs’ Qaddafi next to Allende.

Our French comrades have a word for it, “confusionnisme” (see this site for more information).

That is the tendency of some to blur the distinction between left and right, mixing the worst of both.

The ‘anti-imperialism of fools’ is one axis, conspiracy theories another, and ‘sovereigntism’, anti-European Union calls for national ‘sovereignty’ another.

The former areas have been well covered on many blogs – or, for the fools just look at the above picture.

It’s the latter that comes up today.

Jacques Sapir, an eminent French economist (really, this is not a joke*), who in 2008 publicly backed the Front de Gauche (to the left of the Socialist Party) , has now passed so far to the extreme right – notably through his opposition to the EU, and the Euro, that his material has just appeared on the front page of one of the vilest racist publications in Europe, Eléments (Nouvelle Droite).

This is their latest issue:

*Since 1996, he has been the director of studies at École des Hautes Études en Sciences Sociales (EHESS) in Paris, and head of the Centre d’Étude des Modes d’Industrialisation (CEMI-EHESS.

More on how the Front National is courting him, “L’économiste Jacques Sapir, ex-soutien de Mélenchon, courtisé par le FN. ” 11.1.16.

L’économiste Jacques Sapir, ancien soutien de Jean-Luc Mélenchon, susciterait les convoitises du Front national, selon un indiscret publié ce lundi dans Le Parisien.

D’après le titre, il a participé au mois de novembre à un colloque sur l’euro organisé par les élus du groupe européen du parti d’extrême droite. La réunion était organisée par Bruno Lemaire, le secrétaire général du club Idées Nation, un cercle de réflexion créé par Louis Aliot et proche du Front national.”

The economist Jacques Sapir, a former backer of Jean-Luc Mélenchon, is said to aroused the interest of the Front National according to a leaked note published this Monday in Le Parisien.

In this context he took part, in November, in a colloquium on the Euro held by the MEP’s of the Extreme Right Party. The meeting was organised by Bruno Lemaire, the Secretary of the Club  Idées Nation, a discussion group created by Louis Aliot, and close to the Front National.

Confusionnisme.info

Written by Andrew Coates

January 14, 2016 at 11:57 am

Saudis arrest imprisoned Blogger Raif Badawi’s sister for discussing Human Rights on the Internet.

leave a comment »

La soeur de Raif Badawi emprisonnée

Now we say: JeSuis #‎Samar_Badawi‬!

Riyadh arrests Raif Badawi’s sister for discussing human rights on the internet

Police detained Samar Badawi with her two year old daughter. After a four-hour interrogation they brought her to Dhaban prison. The woman is charged with managing the social media profile of activist and ex-husband Waleed Abulkhair, currently serving 15 years in prison. Activists: “overwhelming evidence” of human rights abuses in Saudi Arabia.

Asia News.

The BBC reports.

The wife of jailed prominent Saudi human rights campaigner Waleed Abu al-Khair has been arrested, activists say.

Samar Badawi was detained for allegedly managing a Twitter account calling for the release of her husband.

Amnesty International called the arrest “the latest example of Saudi Arabia’s utter contempt” for human rights.

Abu al-Khair was jailed for 15 years for “undermining the regime” in 2014. He is the founder of the Monitor of Human Rights in Saudi Arabia group.

Mrs Badawi is also the sister of imprisoned Saudi blogger Raif Badawi, who in 2014 was sentenced to 1,000 lashes and 10 years in prison for insulting Islam.

Raif Badawi’s wife, Ensaf Haidar, also reported the arrest in her tweet: “Urgent: #Samar_Badawi was arrested on the charge of directing @WaleedAbulkhair twitter account.”

Reports in fact emerged yesterday on the various #FreeRaif sites.

It would be appropriate for the new Labour Party leadership now to extend support for the campaign to free Raif to his sister, Mrs Badawi, and to promote human rights more widely against the Islamic dictatorship of Saudi Arabia.

Background: Early Day Motion 21.1.15.

That this House condemns the sentence of public flogging, a fine and a 10 year prison sentence imposed on Raif Badawi in Saudi Arabia for freely expressing his views on the internet; is dismayed that he was given 50 lashes on 9 January 2015 in Jeddah; understands that despite postponement on medical grounds, Saudi authorities intend to carry out further flogging each week until he has received 1,000 lashes; strongly supports his right to freedom of expression; is appalled by the use of corporal punishment in Saudi Arabia and elsewhere; notes with concern Saudi Arabia’s practice of holding prisoners of conscience; calls on the UK Government to take stronger action to ensure that this barbaric punishment is stopped immediately; and further calls on it also to work with its international partners to encourage the Saudi authorities to overturn his conviction and ensure his release.

English Pen: Raif Badawi case discussed in British parliament  Posted 21 July 2015 by

Plight of Saudi blogger cited in Westminster Hall debate on human rights in Saudi Arabia.

The case of imprsioned blogger Raif Badawi was discussed in the British parliament today.  Stewart McDonald MP (SNP, Glasgow South) tabled the motion on Human Rights in Saudi Arabia.

Opening the debate, Mr McDonald spoke out against the harsh sentence of 10 years imprisonment, 1000 lashes and a 1 million riyals fine, and praised Raif Badawi’s writings as representing “the values of freedom and progress that inspire so many people across the world.”

Other parliamentarians who spoke during the debate included Jeremy Corbyn MP(Labour, Islington North). Kerry McCarthy MP (Labour, Bristol East), Stuart McDonald MP (SNP, Cumbernauld, Kilsyth and Kirkintilloch East) and Jim Shannon MP (DUP, Strangford).

Written by Andrew Coates

January 13, 2016 at 1:21 pm